The Neolithic Burial vault at Stein

T H E N E O L I T H I C B U K I A L V A U L T A T S T E I N l P. J. K. MODDERMAN

In June

1963 the Institute for Prehistory of the Universip of Leiden undertook

the

investigation of a Neolithic burial vault in Stein. A wooden struchrre was

found to have at least tcmporarily fonned part of the tomb. The dead had been

cremated.

The grave goods consisted of a collarcdJîask, an earthenware pot,

numerous transuerse arrowheads, bone arrowheads, bone points, animal

remains, and a flint-axe which in al1 probability should be included.

Introduction

During the excavation of a Danubian settle- ment located on the Keerenderkerkweg in Stein, a portion of a smal1 stone floor was found on 3 April 1963: the dragline h i n g used to remove earth to a depth of 50 to 60 cm. stuck a collection of stones which, in the local loess soils, could only be present as a result of human effort. About five stones, whose position had been disturbed by the dragline, were exduded from the investigation. OriginaUy, therefore, there were more stones at the eastem end of tbc floor than are shown in the drawings and photographs.

For a proper understanding of the method employed for this investigation, it wil1 be neces- sary to explain fint the system used for the excavation of the Danubian settlement. It must be kept in mind that the study concerned a settlement, and that the possibility of finding a burial vadt had not even entered our minds in planning the excavation.

l'he area put at our disposal in 1963 measured about half a hectare. The plot, which was 100 m long, was divided into equal strips, 10 m wide, the alternating strips to be excavated simdtaneously. The top 50 cm. of soil on these strips was to be removed by a dragline and deposited on the adjacent strips which were to be excavated later. Halfway through the excava- tion, the entire terrain was to be levelled by a bulldozer, after wbich the dragline would remove the top layer from the remaining strips.

l Provincc af Limburg.

A group of stones was found on the edge of one of the 10 metre wide trenches. I t was immediately clear that there must be more of these stones beyond the trench, and investigation was postponed until the grouud adjacent to the excavated area could be examiued. After al1 the Danubian material had been studied and re- corded, we were able to turn our attention to the stone floor. This point was reached in the middle of June.

Because the floor extended only partially into the open trench, we were able to study the soil profile above the stones. The earth above and next to the stones was for the most part grey. The top soil was delineated by its some- what darker colour and the soil above the stones was also blacker than that further away. No sharp borderline was visible, however; the transition between the shades of grey was very gradual. Nevertheless, it became clear that the stone floor had been laid down at the bottom of a pit, althougb traces of its walls had become indistinct as a result of the intensive organic life characteristic of these loess d s .

The

stone

floor

The shape of the floor may be roughly described as oblong. It is about 5.5 m. long and 1.75 m. wide, the orientation being W.S.w.- E.N.E. Most of the stones seem to have been put in place with some care, for the purpose of making a true floor, with tbe exception of the

Fig. I. Vertieal exposure showing the stone flwr with the collared flask in n'fu. Scale 1 : 40.

P. J. R. Modderman - The Neolithic Burin1 Vault ot Stein N.E. end. At that end some large and small

stones were jumbled together and between them lay some sherds from one pot. The floor, if the t e m may be applied here, is also narrower at this ~ o i n t . In addition, it is at this end that a few stones are missing from the picture as we report it; it was here that the dragline first hit the collection of stones and moved a few of them, for which reason they were excluded from consideration.

Among the rather small stones forming the floor there are several larger ones. A group of five is located at the N.E. side of the true floor, the largest with a flat side up. To effect this, the stone had to be partially buried (see section in Fig. 2). The arrangement suggests that this is a threshold. The same may be said for a second large, flat stone located ahout 1 m. from the S.W. end of the floor.

After the stone floor had been entirely cleaned we muld see that running lengthwise through the middle of it was a slightly lower strip about 35-55 cm. wide. I t seemed as though only thii narrow strip had formed the actual buriai chamber. The wncentration of the cremation remains agreed with this impression, which was also strengthened by the position of sweral larger stones (see Fig. 6 ) .

It should be emphasized that the cremation remains and other finds did not rest directly

on the stones; the stones themselves were covered by a thin layer of greyish earth a few centimetres thick.

Thc post-holes

In discussing the stone floor, no mention has been made of the pst-holes which are nonethe- l e s a striking element in the entire construction and cannot be considered to be a separate element. The four post-holes form the corners of a square lying almost symmetrically in rela- tion to the stone floor, with the exception of the narrower N.E. end. Within two of the post-holes, the posts could be distinguished. The post furthest to the N.E. was evidently shored up between several large stones. The Same holds to a lesser extent for the S.E., and S.W. posts.

We may now ask what the relation could have been between the posts and the stone floor: were they constmcted at the same time or did one precede the other? Let US examine

the various possibilities.

It is certain that if the p s t s belonged to an initia1 phase of the monument, the wood was still in such a good condition at the time of any hypothetical reconstruction that it was not removed. This is home out by the fact that there are no stones where the post9 were in position.

6 Analecta Pmehirtorica Lridensia I

Fig. 4 . View of the stone flmr with the collared flaok Fig. 5. View of thc stone flmr in the last phase of

in riiu, s e n from the Eaot. excavation, men fmm the Eart.

It is much more likely that the posts were put in position after the flwr was laid down. The stones do not coincide, or barely coincide, with the material filling the post-hole. There also seem to be no reason to reduce the size of the 1.75 m. wide chamber by placing the post within this space at the initia1 constmction.

A restoration of the burial vault may also be indicated by the jumbled heap of stones with the sherds of a single pot at the N.E. end. The impression is that the chamber was 'cleaned up', affecting a few stones and the pot. The cremation remains, as they were found, would then have to be assigned to a smaller chamber to which the wwden constmction also belonged. In agreement with this is the position of the cremations in a narrow strip in the middle of the floor.

The foregoing would seem to give best sup- port to a reconstruction accocding to which a primary burial vault without a determinable wooden structure was renewed by the placement of four heavy posts. It might even be suggested that the walk of the original chamber had little or no reinforcement. Loess permits the digging of gwd uenches with straight walk which only cave in if large amounts of water occur. Under such circumstances the oblong pit could first have been provided with only a wooden roof. This solution may in the end have proved unsatisfactory, and have required reinforcement by a wooden siding supported by the four heavy poles. The post-holes leave no doubt whatsoever that the vault with the stone flwr was roofed over, justifying the use of the term burial vault.

Analecta Praehirtorica Leidenria I

dragline which fint exposed the stone floor on 3 April 1963, the axe was thrown on the dump pile. O n 9 May a bulldozer shoved this earth

back into the excavation. When the draglie was then used to start a new excavation trench and a shovel was being used in the loose earth to straighten the sides, the axe was found beside the stone floor. The unusually good condition of the axe indicates that it is not to be considered as a surface find; weathering would have removed al1 traces of grinding and polishing and these are still dearly visible. The axe was therefore buried deliberately.

T h e geographical situation

The contour map shown in Fig. 12 gives an impression of the geographical situation. The stone floor was constmcted about 350 m. from

Fig. 7. Collared flask and pot from the bunal vault at Stein. Scale 1 : 4.

Between the remains of the cremations a very smal1 bead made of an indeterminable material (diam. 3 - 4 mm., width 2.5 mm.) was found. Fragments of 11 bone arrowheads were also found among the cremations (Fig. 10), al1 of them made from ribs. The tops are pointed, and two barbed hooks complete the tip. A distinct termination of the shaft cannot be

demonstrated, and therefore the length

of

the objects is impossible to estimate.

Some of the ribs are only pointed at one end and may therefore be pins.

Among the cremations were a few fragments of animal origin, including a vertebra of a

large fish.

A p o l i e d flint axe (length 13.8 cm.) is

probably to be included in the contents of the burial vault (Fig. 11). The find circumstances were such that absolute certaintv could not he

P. J. R. Moddeman

-

T h e Neolithic Burin1 Voult a t Stein E

Fig. 9. Tra~sverse arrowheads from the burial vault at Stein. Seale 1 : 2.

the sharp drop between the middle terrace of the Maas and the lower terrace. I n relation to the immediate surroundings of Stein, the watershed of the middle terrace, which is characterized by a cover of loess, runs via a clearly-eroded smal1 valley to the lower terrace, whose surface consists of Holocene fluvial depsits from the Maas. The place at which the s m d vaUey cuts the edge of the terrace is alm only a short distance away from the tomb.

Schoppa (see Wurm c.s. 1963, p. 51 and Abb. l ) , in discussing the situation of the chamber tomb near Niedertiefenbach, points to

the correspnding situation found in Calden, Altendorf, and Lohra. Stein is, in my opinion, to be included in this series. The agreement consists of a brook in the immediate vicinity, even though the vaults do not actually lie in a valley. Similar features also occur in the case of the alEdes couvertes in the Paris basin (Daniel 1955, p. 8). The choke of terrain is reminiscent of that of the Danubian settlements, and it is therefore not surprising that Bandkeramik has been found in some of the excavations of Stein- kisten (Ostönnen, Calden, Altendorf, and Stein).

Subsidiary finds at Stain

During the excavations at Stein in 1963, a

round pit was found only 1 m. away from thp burial vault to the N.E. The material f i n g the pit was compsed of a layer of greyish earth topped by a layer of cobble-stones. Long expen- ence with soil traces from various periods in the surrounding loess mils has led me to con- clude that this pit helongs to the same group of

heno ome na

as the tomb.

I n 1963 we alm found sherds from the n m

of an extremely large pot at a depth of about 50 cm., 20 m. to the N.W. of the burial vault. The earthenware of the thick rim (Fig. 13)

(nr. 145) is completely comparable to the earthenware from the burial chamber and as such is important to the study of the prehistorie milieu to which al1 these phenomena belong. I n this connection we must nat neglect to mention a find made in the Thirties, the so- called Robenhausien grave published by Beckers and Beckers (1940, p. 149). Tbis find was made about 90 m. N.E. of the bunal vault and concemed two closely adjacent piles of crema- tion remains. Lying only 30 cm. away was 'a prize wllection of flint artifacts given as grave gwds to the dead'. Doubt may be entertained as to whether the cremations and the flint material belong together, even more so when we wnsider that in 1962, to the N.W. of this so-called Robenhausien grave, several cremation burials were found which had to be dated in the early Iron Age. But even if the cremations and the flint depot are nat wntemporaneous, the latter is still worthy of mention. It consists of a number of large scrapers and ietouched hlades. Unfortunately, dwing the war a num- ber of 'larger and smaller fragments of knives' were lost. Mr. T. Janssen, who worked closely with the senior Dr. Beckers, has told me that it is quite possible that among these 'knife fragments' were transverse armwheads. On inquiry, Mr. G. A. J. Bekers also informed that he was not acquainted with these objects and would therefore in all probability nat have recognized them.

We are now ready, on the basis of the data supplied by the bunal vault in Stein, to attempt to determine the cultural milieu to which the find belongs. The fint to come to mind is the SOM Culture, as defined by Childe and Sandars (1950, pp. 3-6). However, these authors dii- tinctly state that the SOM Culture, if considered as limited to the Paris basin, is very closely related to phenomena distributed over large parts of Europe. We think of the Horgener

Culture, the Westphalian and Hessian Stein- kisten, the Maas-Neolithic in Belgium, the megaliths of the Skogsbo type in Sweden, the ullées couvertes in Brittany. The extent to which the burial vault in Stein fits into this milieu is best illustrated by considering the typical elements separately in relation to finds made in other places.

The chamber tomb itself must unquestionably be assigned to the west-europäische Steinkutcn in Germany (Knöii 1961, Tode 1961, Wurm c.s. 1963) and the &es couvertes in the Paris basin (Chide and Sandars 1950). The absence of the large stones with which the walls and roof were usually built is due entirely to the lack of this material even at considerable distance from Stein. A good counterpart in thii respect is the allle sépulcrale excavated near Bonnières-sur- Seine (Base de Menorval 1953, 1954). In this connection it i s very interesting to d e r to the relation between the various types of burial chambers in the Paris basin and the geological distribution of the building materials discussed by Basse de Menorval (1954, p. 235). The allies couvertes were as a rule built of megaliths,

Fig. I t . Flint axe, very probably from burial vault a t Stein. %ale 1 : 2.

P. J. R. Modderman l'he Neolilhic Burial Vnult al Stain

but some were artificial or natura1 caves (Coutier and Brisson 1959) or vaults built of wood, depending upon local circumstances.

If we are correct in our interpretation of the w o large stones in Stein as thresholds, the floor plan of the bunal chamber would have the dassical three partitions of the allées couvenes. Comparison with the smaller of the two dolmens of Weris (Mariën 1952a, afb. 139) seems most interesting, hut I have been reminded by Prof. Dr. S. J. de Laet and Dr. M. E. Mariën that great care must be taken in drawing conclusions in this respect because there is no certainty that the restoration of the structures in Wéris represents the original situation.

With respect to the wcstfälisch-hessische Steinkisten, the smaU Kisten are to be considered for comparative purposes hecause of heir dimen- sions. These comprise the 14 examples (Knöll 1961, p. 33) described by Knöll (1961, p. 26,

Fig. 12. Contour map of Stein md vieinity.

Fig. 13. Pot rim (find no. 145) found near burial vault at Stein. Sc& 1 : 4.

note 35) as Pendants, and are found not only in Hessen but also in Rhineland, Lower Saxony, Saxony, and Thuringia. The large Steinkisten should certainly not be excluded, particularly when their contents are given due weight.

One characteristic of the chamber tomh in Stein is exceptional, namely that the dead were cremated. As a mle, earlier finds concern burials without cremation. The only case of exclusive cremation is that of the Steinkist of Lohra in Hessen (Uenze 1954). Both inhumations and cremations are reported for several other cham- ber tombs such as Gudensberg in Hessen, Bennungen in Saxony, and a number of allées COUU~teS.

Although they are perhaps less closely related to these examples, the time and place of several cremations known for Germany make them worth mention here. Fischer (1956, p. 220) reports cremations in the Walternienburg- Bernburger Culture, although the practice only became more general in the Schönfelder Culture. There are alm the two kammerlose Hunenbetten in Sachsenwald (Sprockhoff 1952 & 1954) in which traces of calcinated bones were found. Close to one of these cremations a sherd from the rim of a corded beaker was found, and relations are alm present in the form of a certain type of decorated earthenware with a grave in Rötved, Schonen, indicating that the Sachsenwald cremations are of the same date as the Swedish Bootaxt Culture. Sprockhoff

(1952, p. 25, note 22) also points to still other examples of cremations, but al1 of these are located still further to the East, extending across the Oder Kiver.

complete - should also include a recent find in Angels10 (v. d. Waals 1964) where a crema- tion was found together 4 t h late hunebed earthenware. This find could be provided with C,4 dating, 4145 rt 100 (GRN 2370), correspnding to the 23rd and 22nd century B.C. As far as we can judge, these three cultural and absolute datings do not conflict with each other.

On the other hand, mention should not be omitted in this connection of the fact that Neolithic cremations are reported for Great Britain and Ireland. Here we have in mind in the fint place the Clyde-Carlingford Culture which, with its court cairns, fits completely int0 the Megalithic pattem (Piggott 1954, p.

165, de Valera 1960, p. 60). But the Windmill Hili Culture also knew cremations in its long bamws (Piggott 1954, pp. 57, 109-112), as did the Boyne Culture (Piggott 1954, p. 202) and the Dorchester Culture (Piggott 1954, pp. 281 & 353). All in all, the uemations on the other side of the Channel are so widely spread in Neolithic contexts that they must be given just as much wnsideration in the discussion of Stein as the few German examples. The wish to cremate the dead in Stein may tberefore derive from a very wide-spread change in ideas concerning the diposal of the dead. We see, on the one hand, a persisting strong tendency towards collective hurial, but on the other hand there are s i p of a reaction expressed not only in cremation but also in the individual grave.

The pot found in pieces at the N.E. end of the stone floor can in the fint place be wmpared to the earthenware of the SOM Culture. This comparison is not easily made on the basis of the Literature because although coarse earthenware is reprted, illustrations are seldom given. Mariën (1950 & 1952a) summanzes the available material on the basis of the Neolithic fmds in the Belgian Maas region, from which we obtain the impression of being concerned with a single pottery tradition, but the comparison is weakened by such features as the shape, the Stein pot having a more rounded form. The base of the pot is charactenstic of the SOM earthen-

ware. The two separate base sherds from Vaucelles (Mariën 1950, Fig. 7 ) have a similar protnision.

Dr. R. Gensen of Marburg was so kind as tn draw my attention to a very interesting find complex. A trial trench was made at the end of 1963 in a settlement on the Güntersberg, in the municipality of Gudensberg, Kr. Fritzlar- Homberg, in Hessen. Initial study of the fin& from this excavation showed that about 90 per cent consist of thick-walled earthenware con- taining quartz grains. The thick bottoms often have a protruding foot. The rims are bent slightly outwards and are therefore wel1 separated from the body. Among the finds was a collared flask with a neck decorated with wal1 notches, to which we wil1 return shortly. The entire complex is extremely important for the understanding of the culture that produced the Steinkisten.

It is perhaps of importance to mention that after viewing the Wartberg finds in the museum at Fritzlar we had the impression that the pot in Stein has no counterparts in this material. The protruding fooi is lacking, and the profile of the neck of the coarse-walled earthenware also differs.

Of the finds from the German Steinkisten, the earthenware from Altendorf (Jordan 1954) shows a strong relationship to the material found on the Guntersberg, so that in this respect a relationship with Stein must also be considered probable.

A tbird group of finds of comparative interest is that of the so-called Vlaardingen Culture. Among the numerous, as yet unpublished, finds from Vlaardingen are sherds from the base of a pot that Prof. Glasbergen and hii co-workers assure me are entirely comparable with those from Stein. Other relationships with the so- called Vlaardingen Culture wil1 be found in the discussion of the collared flask and the trans- verse arrowheads to follow.

The collared flask with the star-shaped collar must certainly be considered one of the most intemting finds from the burial vault in Stein. With respect to this unusual collar, tbree parallels may be mentioned.

P. J. R. Moddenitaii - Thc Neolithic Hurinl Voulf al Slein 13 a. A find froni a peat excavation at Mellem-

balle near Odense on Funen (Glob 1952, no. 33) which, Prof. Dr. C. J. Becker haa been so k i d as to inform me orally, offen no information for dating.

b. The neck of the bottle dredged up near Oldenburg together with sherds, etc. of the Funnel Beaker Culture (Patzold 1955, Abb. 4b). This star is seven-pointed, like that of Stein. An undamaged collared flask from the same find complex is considered by Patwld to be typologically young. The neck frag- ment is supposed to be older because it is a broken specimen. Within the period that the spot was inhabited, Patwld ma? be correct, but whether this is of value for the archaeological dating remains doubt- ful in my opinion.

c. A 135 mm. high coiiared flask from the alUe couuerte of Mélus, Plouhazlanec (C.- du-N.) in Brittany (Giot 1960, Fig. 19d

& PI. 24). The star has nine points. The allke couverte is one of a group in Brittany recently compared with the hunebeds of The Netherlands and N. W. Germany by J. L.

Helgouach'. These allées have in common that the entrance is in the longitudinal side of the chamber. It is indeed remarkahle that four of the six collared flasks found in Brittany (they are on the average larger than those of the Fumei Beaker Culture) al1 derive from alldes couuertes of this special type.

Apart from the star-shaped collar, the collared flask from Stein may be compared on typological grounds with examples from Haselunne and Meppen (Knöll 1959, Taf. 34 : 17 & 15 respec- tively), Kleinenknethen (Sprockhoff 1938, Taf. 50 : 5), and others characterized by a pro- nounced shoulder and a short neck. Both Knöll and Sprockhoff argue for a relatively late dating of these specimens. KnöU places them in Stufe 2, which corresponds with the Walternienburg- Bemburger Stufe. Knöll also notes (1959, p. 23) that undecorated short-necked collared flasks occw particularly to the West of the Wezer.

"

During the Second Atlantic Colloquium held an 6-11 April at Groningen.

According to U. Fischer, coliared flasks are known from Central Germany in closed finds fmm the late Bernburger Culture (Driehaus 1960, p. 191, l ) , an additional indication that these bottles were only in use for a few centuries. Typologically, the collared flask from Stein is dosely related to the hunebed ware from north- westem Germany and The Netherlands.

The same may be said conceming the two collared flasks with spherical bodies and long necks from the Steinkkten of Lohne and Altendorf (Sprockhoff 1938, Taf. 17 : 11). In addition, the graves yielded two collared flasks of an entirely different type. They are directiy comparable with a find from Wychen (Luudii

1955, Abb. 17 : 9). The latter brings US back to

the fragment5 of collared flasksfromVlaardingen (Altena C.S. 1962) which in al1 probability

represent the same type.

Collared flasks are al90 known from Neuwied* (Buttler 1938, Taí. 23 : 19) and Lohra. The latter indeed lacks the neck, but a complete collared flask from the Guntersberg makes it very probable that the Lohra specimen concerns a similar small, round example. Lastly, I may mention the group of finds from the 'Eyers- heimer Mühle' near Neustadt, Pfalz, in which sherds of collared flasks are also included (Sprater 1928, Abb. 70; Buttler 1938, S. 102). The collared flask from Stein indicates that the dead had had relations with more northerly regions. This is in itself not surprising. Funnel Beaker Ware and axes of northern type are known from Stein and other sites in Limburg (Wouters and Glasbergen 1956). Indeed, many more relations between the Funnel Beaker

Cul-

ture and the westfrïiuch-hesskche Steinkuten can be demonstrated (Knöll 1961; Wurm c.s. 1963). In addition, via the latter group, connec- tions with the Vlaardingen Culture can be made more acceptahle.

To find comparative material for the large number of transverse amwheads we may seeh fint in the SOM Culture. Favret has calculated

'

J. F. van Regteren Altma has been kind enough to inform me a, a result of hia recent visit to

Neuwied that the rurviving pam of this collared flask are apparently fragment. of two different specimens.

14 Analecta Prnehirtorica Lrideniia I

that in chamber tombs cawed in rock, 2000 transverse arrowheads have been found as against only 58 leaf-shaped points (Daniel 1960, p. 47). The hypogeum I1 in Mournouards has given US a completely comparable collection of

transverse arrowheads (Leroi-Gourhan 1963, Fig. 10). The Vlaardingen Culture and the F U M ~ b a k e r Culture show the Mme picture. I n the German Steinkuten however, the trans- verse arrowheads are not very numerous; they are as a mle triangular in shape. Only Calden (Uenze 1951), Altendorf (Jordan 1954), and Hiddingsen (Lange 1934) have yielded trans- verse arrowheads. I t is clear that the relations of the users of the hurial vault in Stein must be wught, with respect to this element, in a south- western and/or northerly direction.

With respect to the axe we wish to refer to only a few comparable examples. Here, too, the French material must be mentioned first, even though it is not considered typical of a particular culture (Leroi-Gourhan 1963, p. 31). A few examples wil1 suffice. Among the rich material from Montigny Esbly (Arnette 1961, Fig. 12) are w e r a l entirely comparable axes. L'Hypogée

I1 in Moumouards also includes a similar axe (Leroi-Gourhan 1963, Fig. 9). On the other hand, an axe of the Same type was found in the well-known Steinkkte of Lohne-Zuschen (Mus. Kassel nr. 1263). For the rest, the few axes in the German Steinkkten are much smaller and of a different shape.

I t proved difficult to fmd parallels for the bone arrowheads. Bone objects are repeatedly mentioned in the literature, but unfortunately no report is made of what they are. Thanks to the kind cwperation of Dr. W. Schrickel, who has just made a complete study of the inventories of the German Steinkisten, the following com- parable finds can be mentioned. The already- mentioned Steinkiite of Lohne-Zuschen con- tained two complete examples. Their shape, however, is somewhat heavier and far less elegant than that of the arrowheads found in Stein. The actual point is shorter and the stem some- what thicker. Dr. Schrickel alm told me of a single specimen from Rimheck Kr. Warburg, and this type of bone arrowhead is supposed to

have been found at Sorsum Kr. Hildesheim ar well.

Erom the allée couuertes I am acquainted only with a so-called pointe de sagaie fmm Montigny-Eshly (Arnette 1961, Fig. 15 : 6) which, although somewhat less delicate than our bone points, is nevertheless comparable.

The foregoing examples indicate that points of arrows or assagais made of bone belonged to the cuitural possessions of the community under discussion.

The single smal1 bead is most suggestive of the numerous beads found in the alléer couuertes. In this respect the connections of the maken of the burial chamber seem to have been orientated towards France.

Summarizing the foregoing, we are stronglv impressed hy the enormously wide distribution evidenced by the cultural elements in the Stein burial chamber. This is not in itself a new idea: the marked agreement between the SOM Culture, westfälisch-hessische Steinkkten, Horgener Culture, etc. has already been pointed out by various authors. But the objects found at Stein c o n í i i this unity in a most fortunatc way. Regional differences do indeed appear, but if they are not overemphasized it is dear that our find as a whole forms an integral part of the cultural pattern of the poples who inhabited Nonhern France, BeIgium, South- Netherland, and Western Germany before the rise of the beaker cultures. We are Eest informed with respect to their mortuary cult, but it is not excluded that the so-called Vlaardingen culture wil1 provide US with an exceptionally g didea

of their manner of living, albeit under somewhat exceptional environmental conditions.

T o take up the question of the dating of the Stein tomb, it must in the fint place be noted that the Cl* method cannot be applied to the charcoal because part of the material filling the chamber consisted of waste from the Danubian settlement that through the activities of animals had bewme mixed with the remains of rhe cremations. A sample of gueranteed purity could therefore not be collected and absolute dating can only be derived indirectly.

P. J. R. Moddeman - The Neolithic Buriol Voult at Stein 15 by the Cl4 dating of the hypogeum I1 in

Mournouards (Leroi-Gourhan 1963, p. 133) which is given as 3812 z!z 1 l 6 and 3683 t 115. On the basis of the multiple burials and the lithic material it is tempting to mnsider this burial chamber as culturally synchmnous with that of Stein. However, arguments can be advanced in strong contradiction to thii, in my opinion, very late C14 dating. These

arguments are based, lor one thing, on the collared flask with the star-shaped collar. T o the best of our knowledge, in any case, these flasks were in use in EN C and MN I (Mtena c.s. 1962, p. 217 ff.). We hesitate to ascrihe the Stein flask with any certainty to either of these periods, although on purely typological grounds we would have a slight preference for MN I. O n the basis of the CI4 dating for Odoorn (GRN 2226) and Anlo (GRN 1824) which represent an early phase of the Dmuwen period and an early Havelte period respectively, an absolute dating in the 26th century B.C. would have to be accepted. If the Vlaardingen Culture

is included in these considerations, it could be put on typological grounds that the coiiared flasks of this culture give the impression of being younger than the Stein flask which is directly comparable with the TRB Culture. As terminus post quem for Vlaardingen or as starting date for tbe neolithic habitation of that place, we have available the Cl* value of 2450

100 B.C. (GRN 2306) (Altena c.s. 1962, p. 216), which is valid evidence for a dating of Stein in the 26th century B.C. For this deter- mination use is made of an argument based on a typological development of the collared flask. We do not consider this basis to be unshakable as yet, but at this moment it it the most aceeptable one we have.

Acknowledgements

I n concluding, we wish to expressourgratitude to al1 those who have been intimately involved in the investigation. The f i t discovery occurred in the phase of the excavations carried out by the State Service for Archaeological Investigations at Amersfoort. The actual excavation of the stone floot was assigned to the Institute for Prehistory of the University of Leiden. The author was assisted by C. van Duijn of the State Service and

J.

P. Boogerd and G. J. V e m e n of the University of Leiden.

A special word of thanks is appmpriately extended here to D. Eckhart and H. C. Zorn of the International Training Centre for Aerial Survey at Delft who assisted in the build'ig of a photography tower fmm which the vertical pictures in Figs. 1 and 3 were made. The drawings in this publication were prepared by J. P. Boogerd and the photographs taken by G.

J.

Vemers. The translation int0 English was done by Mrs. I. Seeger-Wolf at Leiden.

L I T E R A T U R E Altena, J. F. van Regteren, J. A. Bakker, A. T. Clason,

W. Glasbergen, W. Groenman-van Waateringe & L. J. Pons (1962/63), The Vlaardingen Culture, Helinium I1 (1962), pp. 3-35, 97-103, 215-243, Hclinium 111 (1963), pp. 39-54, 97-120.

Arnette, S. (1961), Allées couvertes de 'Seine-Oise- Mme' dans la région d'Esbly, Gnllia Prkhixtoire IV,

pp. 17-89.

B- de Ménorval, E. (1953), Allée Jépulcrale néolithique de Bonnières-sur-Seine. Bull. archiol. hirt. rt rcisnt. dc Bonniircr-rur-Seinc (S. U O.), Nllc Série I, pp. 17-28.

Basse de Ménorval, E. (1954), Deux types nouveaux d3A11ées s&pulcrales néolithiques du Bassin Parisien, référables B la civilisation dite de Seine-Oise-Marne. Cahiers Géologiquer 26-27, pp. 225-240.

Beekera, H. J. en G. A. J. Beckers (1940), Voor- gerchirdcnir uan Zuid-Limburg, Maastricht.

Buttler, W. (1938), Der Donouländischc und dar Wcstirche Kulturkreir der jüngrrcn Steinrcit, Berlin. Childe, V. G. & N. Sandars (1950), La civiliration de Seine-Om-Marne, L'Anfkropologie 54, pp. 1-18. Coutier, L. en A. Briwn (1959), Fouilles d'une grotte sépulture au Mcsnil-sw-Oger (Mame), Bull. Soc. Préh. Frnngnise 56, pp. 70S714.

Daniel, G. (1955), The 'allées couvertes' of France, Archaeol. journ. CXII, pp. 1-19.

Daniel, G. (1960), Prehirforic Chombcr Tombr of

Francr, London.

De Valera, R. (1960), The Court Cairns of Ireland, Proceedings Royal Irirh Acad., Vol. 60 Sectio C No. 2. Driehaus, J. (1960). Dis Altheimer Gruppe und dnr

]ungnaolithikum in Mitteleuropa, Mainz.

Fixher, U . (1956), Die Gräber der Steinzeit irn Saolegcbiet, Berlin.

16 Analecta Proehistorica Leidenria I

Glob, P.V. (1952), Yngn Stenalder, Danskc Oldroger

11, Kebenhavn.

Jordan, W. (1954), Das Steinkammergrab van Alten- dorf. Kr. Wolfhauen. - .Kurhessische Bodenalterturner 3.

pp. ' ~ 2 6 .

Knöll, H. (1959), Die nordwestdeutrche Ticfstich- kcramik und ihrc Stellung i m Nord- und Mittal- curopäischen Neolithikum, Munster.

Knöll, H. (1961), Westfälisch-bessische Steinkisten und Nordwestdeutsche Megalithgräber, . - Fundber. aur Hcsrcn 1, pp. 2 b 3 4 .

Lange, W. (1934), Untersuchung einer neugefundenen grown westfalisdien Steinkiste bei Hiddingsen, Kr. Soest, Bodcnaltcrtumr Westfalens 3, pp. 149-159.

Leroi-Gourhan, A., G. Baillaud & M. Brézillon (1963), I'Hypogée I1 d u Mournouards, Gallia Prdhistoire V, pp. 23-133.

Lüiidik-Kaelas, L. (1955), Wann sind die ersten Meualithgräber in Holland entstanden? P a l m o h i ~ t o i i ~

Iv,-pp. 47-79.

Mariën, M. E. (1950), Poteries de la civilisation de Seine-Oise-Marne en Belgique, Bull. Mus. R. Art

Hirt. 22, pp. 79-85.

Mariën, M. E. (1952a). Oud-Bclnié; Van de eente landbouwers tot de k o m t van ~ o e k , Antwerpen. Mariën, M. E. (1952b), La civilisstion de Seine-Oise- Marne en Belgique, l'Anthropologie 56, pp. 87-92.

Patmld, J. (1955), Eine Siedlung der Grossstein- grableute unter Normalnull bei Oldenburg (Oldb.),

Oldenburger Iahrb. 55, pp. 83-97.

Piggott, S. (1954), T h e ncolithic cultures of thc British I&, Carnbndge.

Schrickel, W. (unpuhlished), Die Inventare der west- deutscben Galenegraber, Beitr. z. Ur-und Friihgesch. Archäol. d. Mittclmerkullurraumer,, Heidelberg.

Sprater, F. (1928), Urgeschichte dcr PfaLr, Speyer.

Sprockhoff, E. (1952), Zwei Megalithgräber aus

Schleswig und Holstein, Offa 10, pp. 15-28.

Sprockhoff, E. (1954), Kammerlose Hünenbetten im Sachsenwald, O f f o 13, pp. 1-16.

Tode, A. (1961), Spätneolithische Steinkiste bei Bredelem a. H m . Krs. Goslar. Narhr. n. Nicder- sachsens Urgcsch. 30, pp. 8 ~ 9 0 .

U e m , 0. (19511, Das Steinkammergrab von Calden, Kr. Hofgeismar, Kurhess. Bodenaltarturner I, pp. 99-97

_.,.

Uenze, 0. (1954), Das Steinkammergrab von Lohra, Kr. Marburg, Kurhess. Bodenaiterturner 3, pp. 27-48.

Waals, J. D. van der (1964), Prshistoric Disc W h c e k

i n thr Nethcrlands, Groningen.

Wouters, A. & W. Glasbergen (1956), Sparen van de hunebcddencultuur in Brabant en Limburg,

Brabants Hcem VIII, pp. 26-32.

Wum, K., H. Schoppa, C. Adel, A. CranietELi (1963), Die Westeuropäische Steidste von Nieder- ticfenbach, Oberlahnkreis, Fundber. a. Hessen 3, pp.